Rheol. Acta, 23, 10-13 (1984) It was claimed that a separable BKZ model, with a potential function given in Eq. (21), fits the damping function in uniaxial extension and shear for Melt I, as well as the Wagner model fits these damping functions. The plot of the fit for uniaxial extension, figure 2 of Larson and Monroe, however, is in error; the fit is actually poor. A potential function, u, that does yield a good fit, not only to shear and uniaxial extensional data, but to biaxial [1] as well, iswhereandwith Co = 0.20, cl = 0.05, c2 = 0.121, and ~ = 0.1.11 and 12 are the first and second invariants of the Finger strain tensor. The damping functions calculated from this potential function are compared to the experimental damping functions in figure 1. The correct amount of strain softening is predicted for all three types of deformation; the Wagner damping function fitted to uniaxial extension predicts too much strain softening in biaxial extension [2]. The Wagner model also predicts a zero second normal-stress difference. Eqs. (1-3) give a negative second normal-stress difference; the predicted ratio of